Maharashtra

Additional DCF, Nagpur

RBT/CC/84/2019

SHRI SARBAJEETSINGH HARMEETSINGH BHATIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

ADV A. T. SAWAL

01 Dec 2022

ORDER

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
NAGPUR
New Administrative Building No.-1
3rd Floor, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440001
Ph.0712-2546884
 
Complaint Case No. RBT/CC/84/2019
 
1. SHRI SARBAJEETSINGH HARMEETSINGH BHATIA
PLOT NO 61, TIRUPATI NAGAR, CHINDWADA ROAD, ZHINGABAI TAKLI, NAGPUR
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER
148, 3RD FLOOR, ABOVE SBI PERSONNAL BANKING BRANCH, THAPER ENCLAVE, MAHARAJBAUG ROAD, RAMDASPETH, NAGPUR 440010
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
2. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH DIVISIONAL BRANCH MANAGER
MAHARAJ 101, 201, 301 JUNCTION OF WESTERN HIGHWAY, ANDERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI 400069
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
3. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH CHIEF BRANCH MANAGER
103 105, SAKUN BUSINESS CENTER, NEAR SWASTIK CROSS ROAD, OPP. C. J. ROAD, AHMADABAD 380009
AHMADABAD
GUJRAT
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. ATUL D. ALSHI PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. SMITA N. CHANDEKAR MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. AVINASH V. PRABHUNE MEMBER
 
PRESENT:ADV A. T. SAWAL, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Adv. Renuka Nalmwar, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
 Adv. Renuka Nalmwar, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
 Adv. Renuka Nalmwar/ Kunal Nalmwar, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 01 Dec 2022
Final Order / Judgement

As per Hon’ble President. Mr. Atul Alshi.

1.                               The complainant has filed complaint against OP for partial disbursement of claim of damage vehicle and then claiming remaining amount Rs.3,84,806/- along with compensation and cost. The complaint’s complaint in short as under-

2.               The complainant had filed complaint against OP for vehicle insurance claim bearing no.478/2015 which was decided on dtd.03/08/2018 in favour of complaint with direction to reassess the complainant’s insurance claim within 30 days with compensation for mental torture Rs.10,000/- and cost of litigation Rs.5,000/-.

3.               The OP’s reassessed the insurance claim of complaint and paid the amount of Rs.2,39,567.50 as per surveyor report towards settlement of claim. The complainant submitted in complaint that the complainant’s vehicle truck bearing No. MH 40 N 3033 insured with OP No. 1 between the period 21/07/2014 to 20/07/2015 for the IDV of Rs.15,00,000/-. The complainant’s vehicle met with an accident on 13/11/2014 at Police Station Shahapur, Distt. Baitul (MP). The FIR has also been registered. The complainant submitted the insurance claim for the repairing of goods amounted Rs.2,21,900/- and theft of goods amounted Rs.3,92,900/- in total Rs.6,14,800/- but the OP awarded the claim of Rs.2,29,994/-  and failed to pay remaining amount of Rs.3,84,806/-. The complainant issued legal notice for disbursement of balance amount of insurance claim but OP failed to comply. Therefore this complaint is filed.

4.               OP No. 1 to 3 filed written statement and submitted that the complainant’s truck was insured with OP No.1 against policy bearing no. 0000000001940180 from 21/07/2014 to 20.07.2015 for the IDV of Rs.15,00,000/- against premium of Rs.27,520/-. The complainant had filed insurance claim along with documents for the accident occurred to the vehicle for the Rs.6,14,800/- The complainant’s OD claim has been settled and paid insurance amount Rs.2,29,994/- as full and final settlement claim as per surveyor report, as per earlier order for settlement of claim has been passed in CC/478/2015.  The complainant has subsequently filed this consumer complaint which is false and frivolous which is not maintainable. Therefore, the case deserved to be dismissed with cost.  

5.               Both the parties argued the case on merit at length. After hearing of case the following points arose for consideration.

  1.  

 

  1. Whether the complainant is consumer ?                Yes.
  2. Whether there is deficiency in service                             on the part of OP?                                  No.     3)  What order ?                          As per final order.

 

                             REASONING

6.               Point No. 1 - The complainant paid premium to the OP and OP issued the insurance policy no. 0000000001940180 and covers the risk of complainant’s vehicle. Hence, the complainant is consumer of OP.

 

  1. Therefore the present  complaint case is dismissed, as per following order.

ORDER

  1. The complaint is dismissed with no order as to cost.
  2. Copy of the order shall be given to both the parties, free of cost.
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. ATUL D. ALSHI]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. SMITA N. CHANDEKAR]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. AVINASH V. PRABHUNE]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.